About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
't want tax cuts. what's amazing is they want austerity at the expense of the pentagon, and that was the whole purpose of the sequester was to hold a gun to the pentagon's head and to poor people's head so that democrats and republicans would both have an incentive to compromise. that's out the window. they would rather have austerity than protect defense spending, which is a whole new shift in the political calculus. >> unexpected one. sfwhoo two things are true. this is a terrible way to govern. it's a terrible way to budget. no rationale person would sit down and say we're just going to have across the board cuts regardless of efficacy of programs. we're going to cut the bad programs as well as the good. no one would do that. the white house put out their numbers last night, the state by state impact numbers. >> the embargo numbers. >> right. you know, we saw them here in new york on the local level, and, obviously, nobody at the local level wants to take a hit. nobody wants to see aid from washington reduced at the local level. there's not going to be blood in the s
to be running the pentagon. >> sam? >> well, i slightly disagree with robert. >> i thought you might. >> you know, actually it's funny because some of these questions did produce interesting, illustrative answers. for instance, when ron johnson got hillary clinton to say what difference does it make? well, it does make a difference. the problem i found with the questions was they ended up stepping on the news. they became so demonstrative and so theatrical that they ended up stealing the spotlight from the answers. that did a disservice in some respects to the question. >> is the real story the feeder of the questions or hagel's fumbling performance? i think it's the latter. i think hagel had a dismal performance at that hearing. did he seem competent to run the pentagon? there were a lot of questions even among democrats after that hearing whether he's ready. >> i don't disagree with that. i think hagel had a really poor performance. what i'm saying is for these senators -- if you looked at what ted cruz was asking about, association with an israeli diplomat that basically 99.9% of the coun
out of federal programs and the pentagon. 800,000 civilian employees have been told by the defense department that they will likely be placed on unpaid leave. with the house and senate still in recess, a number of democrats are calling for congress to reconvene to deal with this mess. secretary of state john kerry, meanwhi meanwhile, is reminding his former colleagues that actions here at home do have global implications. take a listen. >> it is often said that we cannot be strong at home if we're not strong in the world. but in these days of a looming budget sequester that everyone actually wants to avoid, or most, we can't be strong in the world unless we are strong at home. my credibility is a diplomat, working to help other countries create order is strongest when america, at last, puts its own fiscal house in order. and that has to be now. let's reach a responsible agreement that prevents these senseless consults. let's not lose this opportunity because of politics. >> you know, mike barnicle, politics is such a cruel, cruel game. seriously. there's one guy that gets to the to
connell asked the pentagon to get to the bottom of what he called a very troubling story. i'm writing on behalf of a constituent who has contacted me regarding guantanamo bay prisoners receiving post-9/11 gi bill benefits. the constituent wrote to mcconnell about this disturbing information. after reading an article on the duffel blog. it turns out that duffel blog reports on all kinds of stuff, like syria hosting iraq war reenactors. in other words, it's satire, folks. and now mcconnell's office is defending its actions? they put out a statement saying "senator mcconnell's office is hyper vigilant about finding answers to the questions raised by his constituents." how do you make that up, eric? >> that's a ridiculous statement from senator mcconnell's office. yes, senate offices, house office, they get a lot of request for information. but they do have the internet in those offices. they can -- the staff can google things, and they can look to see if they're true or not. i just can't imagine any senate staffer looking at that story and, you know, with what that constituent was requesting think
're making a 7%, 8% cut in the pentagon, the first thing you must do is pull back an aircraft carrier from the persian gulf. really, it's the first thing? with that said, when you begin looking at the numbers and the difficulty of cutting, you realize you can't furlough uniformed military personnel. you're going to end up furloughing civilians. you can't make certain cuts so they become more drastic. in this situation they could have made more long-term. they have multiple deadlines, as we all know. what people in congress are talking about, how to combine them. how do you combine the sequester with the budget battle coming up, with the debt ceiling fight that's going to come back again. how do you add those together so you come up with a larger deal. >> the washington dimension is striking, too. now you have bob woodward of the "washington post" taking on the white house saying the president is moving the goalpost by insisting on tax revenues being in there. let me read a portion of what's in his opinion piece this morning. the final deal reached between vice president biden and senate ma
there's so many installations of military and defense workers. the pentagon noted more than 700,000 civilian military workers, department of defense workers, will effectively lose 20% of their pay. they will have to work one less day a week if this goes in effect. as one observer put it, it's like a low speed car crash heading our way. >> peter alexander from 1600. peter, thank you, sir. >>> wednesday morning the supreme court will hear arguments in a case called shelby county versus holder. it's a case that could determine the future of the landmark voting rights act of 1965. to find out what's at stake, we're going to go ahead and take a reality check on this sunday. peter bacon an msnbc contributor and editor of the grio. let's start at the beginning, if you will, for folks not following the story perhaps. what's at stake here on wednesday? >> the key thing at stake here is this is a law -- this is 1965, that lays out basically for a lot of southern states, states that had a history of discrimination, they had -- the big portion is they have to usually pre-clear any law about
in discretionary. we could actually clean all the waste out of the pentagon which is well over $100 billion a year. it still doesn't solve our problem. we cannot solve our problem unless we change medicare to save it and put a competitive model into our health care system that will allocate that scarce resource. it's really interesting. just yesterday the cms has finished going through all this bidding on durable medical equipment. and the statement coming from cms, for the first time, is hey, we just figured out competition works. about a 41% savings on durable medical equipment not just for the federal government but for the seniors who are going to be doing their co-pay. so competition works. and if it will work -- it works in this area, health care will work in the rest. we've just got to have a little pain. that happened to me as a child frequently with a popular switch. >> okay. well, there you go. >> there's a bumper sticker for 2014. >> chuck, good morning. senator, good morning. chuck, quick question for you. what are the odds you place on sequester going through and two, a government shu
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)